Stop Making Laws, get out of our way and leave us alone! m/r
Articles: Let's Raise a Glass to John J. Blaine
February 20, 2016 By Mark Griswold
Today marks the 83rd anniversary of the passage of the Blaine Act, which initiated the repeal of Prohibition in the United States. It makes for a fitting time to recognize that our government is not the appropriate arbiter of morals, no matter how agreed upon those morals may be.
Prohibition came to pass as a result of the crusading Women's Christian Temperance
Union and others who sought to cure society's ills – not through appealing to the better angels of its nature, but through the long arm of the law. As a result, the effort largely failed. It was part of a larger movement by Progressives to end all sort of "abuses" like gambling and drug abuse. It's no wonder that the Progressives movement of today seeks to combat its pre-conceived societal ills in much the same fashion, be they the internal combustion engine, guns, or 32-oz. sodas.
But surely, you protest, we cannot devolve into anarchy, letting everyone do as they please, no law to live by, only subtle persuasion. No, we cannot. Anarchy, like totalitarianism, has been proven not to work everywhere it has been tried. So where do we draw the line between which morals to enforce with compulsion and which to enforce with
appeal? The answer, as is usually the case, rests in the first lines of our Declaration of Independence, which decree that we are endowed by our Creator with certain unalienable Rights, among them life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness (also known as estate or property, if the Lockean origins of the Declaration are to be believed).
This means that my rights to do whatever I want end where the tips of my fingers touch the tip of your nose, or whatever the tips of your fingers have created. Murder, then, clearly, is an act that government has the duty to prevent. So, too, are theft, rape, and slavery. But drinking? Hardly.
-go to link-
Prohibition came to pass as a result of the crusading Women's Christian Temperance
Union and others who sought to cure society's ills – not through appealing to the better angels of its nature, but through the long arm of the law. As a result, the effort largely failed. It was part of a larger movement by Progressives to end all sort of "abuses" like gambling and drug abuse. It's no wonder that the Progressives movement of today seeks to combat its pre-conceived societal ills in much the same fashion, be they the internal combustion engine, guns, or 32-oz. sodas.
But surely, you protest, we cannot devolve into anarchy, letting everyone do as they please, no law to live by, only subtle persuasion. No, we cannot. Anarchy, like totalitarianism, has been proven not to work everywhere it has been tried. So where do we draw the line between which morals to enforce with compulsion and which to enforce with
appeal? The answer, as is usually the case, rests in the first lines of our Declaration of Independence, which decree that we are endowed by our Creator with certain unalienable Rights, among them life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness (also known as estate or property, if the Lockean origins of the Declaration are to be believed).
This means that my rights to do whatever I want end where the tips of my fingers touch the tip of your nose, or whatever the tips of your fingers have created. Murder, then, clearly, is an act that government has the duty to prevent. So, too, are theft, rape, and slavery. But drinking? Hardly.
-go to link-
No comments:
Post a Comment